Computer sent missing plane off flight path, page 1

posted on Mar, 18 2014 @ 07:14 AM

link

Washington: The first turn to the west that diverted the missing Malaysia Airlines plane from its planned flight path from Kuala Lumpur to Beijing was carried out through a computer system that was most likely programmed by someone in the plane's cockpit who was knowledgeable about airplane systems, according to senior U.S. officials.

Instead of manually operating the plane's controls, whoever altered Flight 370's path typed seven or eight keystrokes into a computer on a knee-high pedestal between the captain and the first officer, according to officials.

Computer sent missing plane off flight path

This is interesting, so the plane wasn't diverted manually (well sort of) it was diverted using the flight computer system..

This would mean that the theory about shadowing another plane COULD be accurate....

hmm The mind boggles at this one..

amraks

posted on Mar, 18 2014 @ 07:35 AM

link

amraks

posted on Mar, 18 2014 @ 07:37 AM

link

soficrow

posted on Mar, 18 2014 @ 09:46 AM

link

reply to post by vkey08

Great info, great title. Thanks muck. Makes me think back to 9/11 - always wondered why nobody talked about at least the possibility of a computer override.

F&S

AugustusMasonicus

posted on Mar, 18 2014 @ 09:56 AM

link

soficrow
reply to post by vkey08

Great info, great title. Thanks muck. Makes me think back to 9/11 - always wondered why nobody talked about at least the possibility of a computer override.

F&S

Because it is not done remotely, it has to be done on the flight deck.

jazz10

posted on Mar, 18 2014 @ 02:27 PM

link

reply to post by vkey08

Told ya.
Yet when I mentioned hijackers didn't necessarily need to be on board and that maybe the technology via .........

oh man I'm not explaining it all again.

Iridium system

was there a geomagnetic storm or blackout on or around the time that would have altered the gps.
If not can a cargo of gold effect the on board systems.
Flying simulators lol.
maybe the pilot flown it from home.

edit on 18-3-2014 by jazz10 because: (no reason given)

smurfy

posted on Mar, 18 2014 @ 02:53 PM

link

The US officials insist that it was a manual input in the plane, or more exactly, in the cabin. Does that mean the scenario in this video does not exist? I mean you can read between the lines why US officials would say that, even if the scenario below does exist.

HugoTeso searched for exploitable vulnerabilities in real aircraft code but opted to use virtual planes in a lab setting to demonstrate his technique, since hijacking real planes in flight is "too dangerous and unethical." He used ACARS [Aircraft Communications Addressing and Reporting System] to break into the craft's onboard computer and upload Flight Management System data; he was then able to steer the craft while it was in autopilot mode.

Pilots can counteract that attack by switching off autopilot, but the greater problem is that many planes no longer have analog flight instruments and are thus susceptible to other kinds of manipulation. Teso said he could control most aircraft systems, put planes on collision courses and even give passengers a fun and exciting surprise by forcing the oxygen masks to drop.

Again, for emphasis: People aren't about to start using their HTCs to turn Dreamliners into RC toys. But Teso made it clear that current systems aren't exactly safe, either, and it will be a long time before that situation improves: The successor to ACARS, which will be encrypted, will take 20 years to be fully deployed.

edit on 18-3-2014 by smurfy because: Text.

jazz10

posted on Mar, 18 2014 @ 03:06 PM

link

May I?
Iridium System
From my thread link to post

Here's another piece I feel members should look into
The new seven sisters

Do you see a connection to oil also?

Im merely sharing what I see. Im not saying its fact. But the last time twin towers were involved......many birds were killed with one stone.

RocksFromSpace

posted on Mar, 18 2014 @ 03:10 PM

link

Ivar_Karlsen

posted on Mar, 18 2014 @ 03:19 PM

link

HugoTeso

Hacked a pc based ACARS simulator.
What he claimes is impossible because
1. Neither the ADS nor the ACARS are directly linked / connected to the flight control system, period.

2. The FMS is connected to the flight control system when the autoflight / autothrust systems are being guided by the flight plan data and (to a much lesser extent) the weight-and-balance data entered during the ramp check.

2. The ADS system is an ATC communications system which has no connection to the FMS. ATC cannot control the routing, speed or altitude of the aircraft through ADS.

3. While some operators routinely upload flight plan and weight-and-balance data via ACARS during the ramp flight preparation sequence, many operators' do not have this auto-upload capability and the data is entered manually. In manually-entered circumstances there is no way to upload changes to the flight plan routing via the ACARS to affect aircraft navigation through the FMS which is connected to the autoflight system.

4. Given system and aircraft design, logically the autoflight system must be engaged for this to "work". The FMS has the route data and the autoflight is designed to follow that data.

5. FMS data cannot control altitude and will not command the aircraft to climb or descend even if cruise altitude changes and descent points have previously been entered or otherwise programmed in the FMS. Neither can ACARS nor ADS do this.

6. Within a narrow Mach or CAS range, when routinely engaged, the autoflight / autothrust systems are controlled by the FMS which in turn will control aircraft cruise speed. Cruise speed and speed restrictions at certain waypoints, (oceanic entry and exit points, for example), may be part of the flight plan. As with any FMS entries, there are reasonableness checks which reject incorrect or inappropriate data.

7. Should something like that which is claimed actually succeed, there are at least two human pilots in the cockpit, sometimes three or four depending upon phase of flight, etc who can fly the aircraft manually. When the autoflight system is disconnected none of this works. Also, routine enroute waypoint checks confirm position, speed, altitude, next position and so on and, should immediate but subtle anomalies occur enroute, they would be caught at such waypoints.
edit on 18-3-2014 by Ivar_Karlsen because: (no reason given)

smurfy

posted on Mar, 18 2014 @ 04:04 PM
link

Ivar_Karlsen
[
7. Should something like that which is claimed actually succeed, there are at least two human pilots in the cockpit, sometimes three or four depending upon phase of flight, etc who can fly the aircraft manually. When the autoflight system is disconnected none of this works. Also, routine enroute waypoint checks confirm position, speed, altitude, next position and so on and, should immediate but subtle anomalies occur enroute, they would be caught at such waypoints.
edit on 18-3-2014 by Ivar_Karlsen because: (no reason given)

All well and good, especially the last paragraph..but, there's more than just what's mentioned on the video I posted.

DR Justin Cappos, computer science and engineering at NYU-POLY says it can be done.

Rep. Peter King, Chairman, counterterrorism and intelligence is drafting legislation to "prevent its use"

So some people were rattled...last year.

Thing is, when someone says something can't be done, there is always a head that will pop up and say it can. This is digital defense that is being attacked digitally in this scenario, not ten foot thick steel fortress doors. More video and info at the link

videos.huffingtonpost.com...

Ivar_Karlsen

posted on Mar, 18 2014 @ 04:16 PM
link

smurfy----->DR Justin Cappos, computer science and engineering at NYU-POLY says it can be done.

Ivar Karlsen, Professional pilot rated on several airliners among them the B777 say it can't.
Because there's no entry point to the flight controls outside the flight deck (or the Electronics bay)

Industrial computers like those used in safety critical enviroments like flight controls in airliners are designed very different from PC's.

markymint

posted on Mar, 18 2014 @ 04:25 PM
link

Yep! And too much media is assuming it was the pilot or co-pilots choice to enter this command into the computer.

Please re-read.

Instead of manually operating the plane's controls, whoever altered Flight 370's path typed seven or eight keystrokes into a computer on a knee-high pedestal between the captain and the first officer, because they were ordered to by officials.

Because it wasn't an emergency situation. Because they were asked to do it on the pretense it was a normal, verified procedure, a highly necessary course change due to a direct command or order given to them from someone. If it was a hijacking by a passenger, a manual turn would clearly indicate something is wrong. I don't think captain or co-pilot really understood the brevity of their situation. They are asked to turn, and change to a non-typical frequency, despite reassurances their next ground control operator was made aware.

Shortly they are escorted by other military jets of unknown origin. UFO's on the radar, it's their escort coming in? The pilots are all this time either being fed info or being left blind of info other than a few stark commands on this new frequency, their course ensures they are only speaking in Malaysian controlled airspace, so there's no verifying with Vietnam etc. Confused but following orders cos they have two jets outside their window, and they don't really know what's going on, so they're maintaining things best they can.

.............is where I'm going with this right now

Phatdamage

posted on Mar, 18 2014 @ 04:28 PM
link

computers or Pilots, which ever actually caused this, one question......

with todays radar and boarder control (as we are on the brink of war) did no one follow this plane???

i think they have, and what happened to it they cant tell people about.... maybe it China were testing there new tractor beam on there UFO tech stolen from aliens?

smurfy

posted on Mar, 18 2014 @ 06:42 PM
link

Ivar_Karlsen

smurfy----->DR Justin Cappos, computer science and engineering at NYU-POLY says it can be done.

Ivar Karlsen, Professional pilot rated on several airliners among them the B777 say it can't.
Because there's no entry point to the flight controls outside the flight deck (or the Electronics bay)

Industrial computers like those used in safety critical enviroments like flight controls in airliners are designed very different from PC's.

Let them sort it out then, you don't even say if what Karlson is saying, is in direct opposition/AKA reply, to what Dr Justin Cappos has said. You are missing the point, What Hugo Teso discovered is vunerability in the systems, the phone app in itself is only an interface to activate a base source. In fact as I read it, Teso went to great length in making sure that the software and hardware vunerabilities he discovered were not accessible to anyone.
There are other possibilities, and at first my thoughts went straight to the Helios flight where everyone basically went to sleep, then you get the US officials saying someone was stroking the keys manually in the cockpit/AKA emphasis on deliberate. Again, at first I thought okay but hey! if you are in the mumbles it could well be something to do if not in a straight state of mind, just something else to consider, and the decompression could be tiny, and anywhere on the aircraft, and who knows in itself cause disablement of systems. Very plausible then, so why is the US going with with their version of events? No wonder the families are getting desperate, they know they are being fed official bull.

tetra50

posted on Mar, 18 2014 @ 06:57 PM
link

First, nice thread about a horrible subject Vcky08. Second, I'm not expert, on aviation, or computers.
However, we have plenty of information these days about remotely controlling others' brains, for goodness sakes, continent's apart….once that "handshake" and the necessary hardware (or software…..science fiction called it "wetware" when referring to living beings' minds) is possible and installed….. A door from which to enter provides a path both ways.

I know it's not particularly "safe" perceptively or relatavistically to think that a public transport airplane could be "hacked" and guided elsewhere than its originally programmed destination, but to me, it begs the question, in terms of the technology we already know exists, in every other measurable and perceiveable way, including and not limited to our own brains, that remote interruption and reconnaisance is not possible.

And, as all of you, I hope the best for those 230 some souls on board…… Because this is what is caught in the crossfire of the developing technology and war for power and control.
Regards,
Tetra50

Link

GogoVicMorrow

posted on Mar, 18 2014 @ 07:40 PM
link

jazz10
reply to post by vkey08

Told ya.
Yet when I mentioned hijackers didn't necessarily need to be on board and that maybe the technology via .........

oh man I'm not explaining it all again.

Iridium system

was there a geomagnetic storm or blackout on or around the time that would have altered the gps.
If not can a cargo of gold effect the on board systems.
Flying simulators lol.
maybe the pilot flown it from home.
edit on 18-3-2014 by jazz10 because: (no reason given)

Wrong. You do have to be on the flight. If you read the post you would've seen that the pilot or co pilot would have to enter in the alt plan on a console that sits between the pilot and co pilot.

tetra50

posted on Mar, 18 2014 @ 08:05 PM
link

GogoVicMorrow

jazz10
reply to post by vkey08

Told ya.
Yet when I mentioned hijackers didn't necessarily need to be on board and that maybe the technology via .........

oh man I'm not explaining it all again.

Iridium system

was there a geomagnetic storm or blackout on or around the time that would have altered the gps.
If not can a cargo of gold effect the on board systems.
Flying simulators lol.
maybe the pilot flown it from home.
edit on 18-3-2014 by jazz10 because: (no reason given)

Wrong. You do have to be on the flight. If you read the post you would've seen that the pilot or co pilot would have to enter in the alt plan on a console that sits between the pilot and co pilot.

Absolutely tremendous post, on a sight denying ignorance…..did you see my post above yours with link? This site is painting itself into a corner with information, and this is a good example of that. Economically speaking, no one wants to believe this remote control is possible, but if it can happen with my brain, or my home computer, you think IT CAN"T HAPPEN ON A FRIGGIN PLANE?????

Get real. This site is daily embracing and sustaining and furthering ignorance…..
Tetra

Taobender

posted on Mar, 18 2014 @ 08:07 PM
link

1. The pilot had the Diego Garcia runway programmed into his homemade flight simulator for practice runs

2. Maldiv Islanders saw the plane heading towards Diego Garcia

3. I'm sure these are just coincidences

tetra50

posted on Mar, 18 2014 @ 08:23 PM
link

Taobender
1. The pilot had the Diego Garcia runway programmed into his homemade flight simulator for practice runs

2. Maldiv Islanders saw the plane heading towards Diego Garcia

3. I'm sure these are just coincidences

I love #3…..and I am sure they are, too. just like lightening striking. But even thinking in terms of Diego Garcia may be a mistake…..

There were obvious electromagnetic,and "weather" issues, that night or soon after…. I would refer anyone who questions what I am suggesting to any of The Gut's threads, and others, regarding the same phenomena……

There is a tale of soldiers, Navy, on a ship, suspended "between" the illusion of time, perpetually tortured…….

I would so hope that these people have not found themselves, thinking of something else entirely, in a subsequent position……
Tetra